ArticleJournal of global health2024
Trend and projection of the prevalence and burden of near vision loss in China and globally from 1990 to 2030: A Bayesian age-period-cohort modeling study.
Article in Journal of global health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Socioeconomic inequalities in self-reported vision impairment among middle-aged and older adults in China: a national longitudinal study from 2011 to 2018.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- The burden of near vision loss from 1990 to 2021, and projections until 2032-findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.Eye (London, England) · 2026Article
- Age-period-cohort analysis of pulmonary tuberculosis epidemiological trends from 2005 to 2024 and forecasts for 2035 in Sichuan Province, China.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Gender differences in the burden of near vision loss in China: An analysis based on GBD 2021 data.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025Article
- Global burden of asthma attributable to high body mass index in older adults 1990-2021 and prediction to 2050: An analysis of Global Burden of Disease Study 2021.The World Allergy Organization journal · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Few studies have investigated near vision loss (NVL) in China. To address this gap, we aimed to explore trends in the prevalence and disease burden of NVL from 1990 to 2019 and to predict trends over the next decade. Methods: Using data from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 study, we calculated the age-standardised prevalence rate (ASPR), age-specific disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and annual percentage change (EAPC) in China and different regions. We then used the Bayesian age-period-cohort (BAPC) predictive model to predict the prevalence trends from 2020 to 2030 in both contexts. Results: At the global level, ASPRs increased from 5613.27 in 1990 to 5937.81 per 100 000 population in 2019, with an EAPC of 0.06. The ASPR in China specifically decreased from 7538.14 in 1990 to 7392.86 per 100 000 population in 2019 (EAPC = -0.02). The age-standardised DALY rate was higher in women than in men, both globally and in China. The NVL burden was relatively higher in low-income regions, low sociodemographic index regions, and the South-East Asia Region compared to other regions. The predictive model indicated that the ASR trend for NVL slowly increased at a global level after 2020, yet decreased in China. Conclusions: Despite a decline in the age-standardised prevalence of NVL in China over the next decade, the current burden remains substantial. To alleviate this burden, decision-makers should adopt inclusive approaches by involving all stakeholders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.